|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 9:09 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
I find the hatred of wealth that permeates this board, (and society in general, really), to be vaguely creepy at best and outright discrimination at worst. It shows a very base attitude from those who indulge in it, namely jealousy.
Let's face it, everyone wants to be rich, whether they will freely admit it, or not. They can't see a way of earning the things they want in life through legitimate means, so they advocate expropriating other peoples possessions.
Everyone wants to be "rich" but how can you be something you hate? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
They don't give the money away! They have Rockefeller charities (such as the Rockefeller Foundation) which they place the money into enabling them to avoid income tax. This is the oldest trick in the book. You may think they're spending all this money to save starving children, but this simply isn't the case.
According to wikipedia (cited paragraph) most of the money in the Rockefeller Foundation is held in Exxon-Mobil shares!
| Quote: |
The foundation also has traditionally held a major portion of its shares portfolio in the family's oil companies, beginning with Standard Oil and now with its corporate descendants, including Exxon Mobil.[20]
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockefeller_Foundation#cite_note-19
They also spend a lot of money funding think tanks which gives them power of over American policy (CFR, Trilateral Commission, Council of Americas) and label it 'charity' as well.
The Rockefeller Foundation is the single largest funder of Eugenics on earth, and also of biotechnology (promoting GMOs around the world).
| Quote: |
| Rockefeller Foundation President Judith Rodin announced that the Foundation will provide funding to the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) for shepherding the genetically modified Golden Rice through the national regulatory approval processes in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and the Philippines. |
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/news/387.rockefeller_foundation_fund_golden_rices_regulatory_approval.html
They also work with Monsanto, the most despicable company I can think of, to promote their mutant foods around the world...
| Quote: |
We - Monsanto, others in the biotechnology industry, the Rockefeller Foundation, the poor and excluded - are all part of an evolving global system which has not yet adopted what Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen called a "balanced set of ground rules" to ensure that everyone in the world can have the possibility of improving their lives and livelihoods.
At The Rockefeller Foundation we know that globalization cannot be turned back. But we also know that if we cannot figure out a way for this world-wide system to work for everyone, over the long run it will not work for any of us. |
http://www.biotech-info.net/gordon_conway.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rusty Shackleford wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
I find the hatred of wealth that permeates this board, (and society in general, really), to be vaguely creepy at best and outright discrimination at worst. It shows a very base attitude from those who indulge in it, namely jealousy.
Let's face it, everyone wants to be rich, whether they will freely admit it, or not. They can't see a way of earning the things they want in life through legitimate means, so they advocate expropriating other peoples possessions.
Everyone wants to be "rich" but how can you be something you hate? |
Do you actually think you're living in a free market economy??? YOU'RE NOT! You are living in a society run by a gigantic ponzi scheme where the banks contribute literally nothing, but control issuance of money. When the ponzi scheme collapses the banks invariably keep the defaulted assets.
Do you still not understand how fractional reserve banking works??? It's legalized fraud! In a free market economy, competition is allowed - in the USA, the banks control everything! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
For the record, I am all for a free market where each person is allowed to own their own property and compete fairly. A central banking system, however, and the income tax that invariably results (to pay the interest on money the gov't borrows from the central bank) are two of the main 'planks' of Marxism.
| Quote: |
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
The 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913 (which some scholars maintain was never properly ratified), and various State income taxes, established this major Marxist coup in the United States many decades ago. These taxes continue to drain the lifeblood out of the American economy and greatly reduce the accumulation of desperately needed capital for future growth, business starts, job creation, and salary increases.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
The Federal Reserve System, created by the Federal Reserve Act of Congress in 1913, is indeed such a "national bank" and it politically manipulates interest rates and holds a monopoly on legal counterfeiting in the United States. This is exactly what Marx had in mind and completely fulfills this plank, another major socialist objective. Yet, most Americans naively believe the U.S. of A. is far from a Marxist or socialist nation. |
http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/TenPlanks.html
Anyone who thinks the banks in the US are making profit in a 'free market' are completely mistaken. The USA is one of the most socialist (in a bad way) countries on earth. Honest people who play by the rules are about to get devastated in the coming depression, caused by bank-induced inflation and the Fed debasing the dollar, and $13 trillion has already been pilfered from the public purse and handed to the banks as a result. Stalin couldn't have done a better job if he tried. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Anyone who thinks the banks in the US are making profit in a 'free market' are completely mistaken. |
It's true. They're given huge benefits by the state because they "own the place".
| Quote: |
| The USA is one of the most socialist (in a bad way) countries on earth. |
Well, socialism for the rich. Often called corporatism.
Don't get too worked up about it. The CRE disaster will teeter over the big banks in short order. Those things that can't be sustained, won't. Mr. Obama may be suffering from Summers induced regulatory capture today, but when it comes time to start planning for the next election, he'll see the light, and if he doesn't, will be a one termer. We're in the eye of the hurricane right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Anyone who thinks the banks in the US are making profit in a 'free market' are completely mistaken. |
It's true. They're given huge benefits by the state because they "own the place".
| Quote: |
| The USA is one of the most socialist (in a bad way) countries on earth. |
Well, socialism for the rich. Often called corporatism. |
Also know as fascism (the original definition).
| Quote: |
| Don't get too worked up about it. The CRE disaster will teeter over the big banks in short order. Those things that can't be sustained, won't. Mr. Obama may be suffering from Summers induced regulatory capture today, but when it comes time to start planning for the next election, he'll see the light, and if he doesn't, will be a one termer. We're in the eye of the hurricane right now. |
I think you seem to keep missing the point... the banks already know the system is certain to fail. They have been prepared for it for a long time, it might even be argued that they are causing the current collapse deliberately. In any case, the banks don't lose. They commit fraud on an epic scale, and collect all the real assets when the house of cards collapses.
Obama is a puppet with no power to stop this collapse, and no intention of trying since he is obviously working with Wall street 100%. He probably is a 1-term president, that's all the time they need, it's all going to collapse before then anyway.
You say "don't get worked up about it", well there will most certainly be huge riots when economy really collapses, and the government will have to deal with it. This might mean moving into a full on police state, or entering into a new war somewhere. At the very least it will basically shatter the American dream of each person having a fair shot at advancing himself/herself for the forseeable future.
I don't think this is fear-mongering, it's the reality of what awaits us when the bailout bubble bursts. It's going to be really, really bad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is much less sexy and nefarious than you think. The banks are partaking in rent seeking behaviour. They're getting away with what they're allowed to get away with.
Like I wrote in another thread, the government is comprised of JD's who have no meaningful understanding of the economy. They are easily manipulated. There is no conspiracy. Just good ol corruption.
Paul Volker is waiting in the wings. Obama will dump Benny, Timmy and Larry during the next leg of this depression. Volker has iron balls. But in the event that the next shoe drops and Obama goes ahead and puts Larry in the Fed seat, I'll go ahead and put a tinfoil hat on. Cause there is no reasonable explanation for that other than Goldman's owns Obama's arse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
They don't give the money away! They have Rockefeller charities (such as the Rockefeller Foundation) which they place the money into enabling them to avoid income tax. This is the oldest trick in the book. You may think they're spending all this money to save starving children, but this simply isn't the case.
l |
Link please? And to reputable verifiable sources...not to some blog somewhere on the internet...a schoolarly work or major newspaper would be nice.
And until such time as you provide such sources we can rest assured that anything you say on this subject is uninformed and quite possibly libelous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
They don't give the money away! They have Rockefeller charities (such as the Rockefeller Foundation) which they place the money into enabling them to avoid income tax. This is the oldest trick in the book. You may think they're spending all this money to save starving children, but this simply isn't the case.
l |
Link please? And to reputable verifiable sources...not to some blog somewhere on the internet...a schoolarly work or major newspaper would be nice.
And until such time as you provide such sources we can rest assured that anything you say on this subject is uninformed and quite possibly libelous. |
You've got to be the most self-righteous poster on here. I provided a couple links which you completely disregarded, if that's not good enough for you then too bad.
Do your own research - I already know the kind of poster you are: nothing I post will ever convince you (same as on the Dokdo threads), you've already decided you know best, and that you're the expert  . The onus isn't on me anyway, it's on the Rockefellers (who claim they are philanthropists, even though they keep most of their "charities" as stock in their oil companies and use most of the money to fund Eugenics and elitist think tanks).
Unfortunately the Rockefeller family doesn't post on this site, so how about you , the one defending them here, provide some "schoolarly" links showing where their money actually goes? Step up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
It is much less sexy and nefarious than you think. The banks are partaking in rent seeking behaviour. They're getting away with what they're allowed to get away with.
Like I wrote in another thread, the government is comprised of JD's who have no meaningful understanding of the economy. They are easily manipulated. There is no conspiracy. Just good ol corruption.
Paul Volker is waiting in the wings. Obama will dump Benny, Timmy and Larry during the next leg of this depression. Volker has iron balls. But in the event that the next shoe drops and Obama goes ahead and puts Larry in the Fed seat, I'll go ahead and put a tinfoil hat on. Cause there is no reasonable explanation for that other than Goldman's owns Obama's arse. |
At the end of the day neither of us can really know what goes on behind closed doors. You may be right, however I think they all know exactly what they are doing and are coordinating their efforts. Geithner was the president of the NY Fed, so I really have to assume he knows what he's doing! Obama probably doesn't understand the technical side of things, but I bet he knows exactly the direction the economy is heading and was forewarned long in advance of becoming president. You'd have to be an ignoramus not to! And I don't buy it.
I don't think these people could stop the collapse if they wanted (Volcker or anyone else), but they are exploding the economy in a controlled way on their own terms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Cheonmunka wrote: |
None of them are going to live to 100. People have the same restraints - the body of a rich 70 year old is the same as a body of a far less moneyed 70 year old. Each has their friends, a roof over their head, a spose, a decaying body.
Keeping all that money to oneself just means one is a greedy f^%k. |
You might want to check out just how much money the Rockfellers gave away to charity. John Rockefeller (according to some sources) gave away 550 million dollars to various charities over his lifetime.
As for David Rockefeller his latest gift to charity was in the neighborhood of 40 million.
Does that seem that is keeping one's money to oneself? As someone else said these are easily verifiable. |
They don't give the money away! They have Rockefeller charities (such as the Rockefeller Foundation) which they place the money into enabling them to avoid income tax. This is the oldest trick in the book. You may think they're spending all this money to save starving children, but this simply isn't the case.
l |
Link please? And to reputable verifiable sources...not to some blog somewhere on the internet...a schoolarly work or major newspaper would be nice.
And until such time as you provide such sources we can rest assured that anything you say on this subject is uninformed and quite possibly libelous. |
You've got to be the most self-righteous poster on here. I provided a couple links which you completely disregarded, if that's not good enough for you then too bad.
Do your own research - I already know the kind of poster you are: nothing I post will ever convince you (same as on the Dokdo threads), you've already decided you know best, and that you're the expert . The onus isn't on me anyway, it's on the Rockefellers (who claim they are philanthropists, even though they keep most of their "charities" as stock in their oil companies and use most of the money to fund Eugenics and elitist think tanks).
Unfortunately the Rockefeller family doesn't post on this site, so how about you , the one defending them here, provide some "schoolarly" links showing where their money actually goes? Step up. |
No, my friend the onus is on the one making the claim. You've claimed they don't donate to charity so prove it. The dubious links you have posted are not the type of links that anyone would use as a scholarly paper or even as sources.
Anyone with access to Google can see that you were completely wrong (as in the Dokdo thread).
But here's some light reading for you http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rockefellers/peopleevents/p_gates.html
Every year the foundation gives 170 million dollars to hundreds of causes.
I suppose all these organizations who receive the money are lying about it as well?
Last edited by TheUrbanMyth on Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Charities are/were not the only organizations that get this money too.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C05EEDF1438EF32A25756C1A9669D946497D6CF
According to this article John D. gave 20 million to Chicago University, 6 million to Rush Medical college, and 1 million each to Harvard, Baptist Missionary Fund, and Southern Educational Fund.
I guess the NYT and all these institutes lied about it as well.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
No, my friend the onus is on the one making the claim. You've claimed they don't donate to charity so prove it. The dubious links you have posted are not the type of links that anyone would use as a scholarly paper or even as sources.
Anyone with access to Google can see that you were completely wrong (as in the Dokdo thread).
But here's some light reading for you http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/rockefellers/peopleevents/p_gates.html
Every year the foundation gives 170 million dollars to hundreds of causes.
I suppose all these organizations who receive the money are lying about it as well? |
Lazy and dishonest, that's what you are. Your link is worthless.
| Quote: |
| The Rockefeller Foundation has given away about $170 million every year to hundreds of causes, ranging from the arts to health, education, housing and food for the disadvantaged. |
This is so vague as to be meaningless. I posted a link showing that they keep most of their money in Exxon-Mobil. You posted a PBS blurb with nothing in it. What are the names of the charities they donate to? You haven't a clue have you?
The Rockefellers control assets in excess of $5 trillion dollars, including all the supermajor oil companies. Even if they did donate a piddly $170 million to charities (which you are unable to show), it doesn't change the fact that they are simply robber barons controlling an empire of finance and energy monopolies, and the largest funders of eugenics and world government think tanks in history. They are a cancer on the world.
Anyway, reality obviously means nothing to you - all you can do is appeal to 'authority' because you're a brainwashed fool. Willful ignorance cannot be countered in a debate.
Last edited by visitorq on Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:50 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
Charities are/were not the only organizations that get this money too.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9C05EEDF1438EF32A25756C1A9669D946497D6CF
According to this article John D. gave 20 million to Chicago University, 6 million to Rush Medical college, and 1 million each to Harvard, Baptist Missionary Fund, and Southern Educational Fund.
I guess the NYT and all these institutes lied about it as well.
|
Yes, they fund many institutions that they wish to exert control over and influence. This is not charity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
